UK in/out referendum on the EU (Brexit vs Bremain)

malickfan wrote:It's got to the point where the car is so badly damaged and out of control that the best we can do is sit back and morbidly enjoy the ride before the actual crash,

Which country's election are we talking about?

From a legal point of view this seems the workings of a healthy democracy. I don't know much about the, admittedly unwritten, british constitution. But from a general point of view the executive branch should have no business meddling with lawmaking. If the ascession of the UK to the EU was passed by law, law would be needed to repeal it.

Might look into the actual facts of the case later, but I'm pretty snowed under at the moment.

Tomorrow we'll apparently be snowed under.. literally

Uhuh, its getting colder here

{{{Well the government say they will appeal the decision. Which could prove to be the most ironic thing to happen yet as if they don't get their way in the UK Court, as still members of the EU, the highest court to decide this could be the EU Court!

But more seriously from what the government is saying they seem to be sticking to their argument that Parliament voted to hold a referendum and give the choice to the people, the people voted and now that gives the PM the right to act without further Parliamentary involvement using her prerogative powers.

But I don't see that beating the Courts reasoning that Parliament is sovereign and it required a Parliamentary act to give the people rights associated with EU so it requires a similar act to repel those rights. That idea, that laws granted by Parliament can only be removed by Parliament, has lots of precedent in UK law- what May is trying to do doesn't have any. I don't see her winning. }}}

she cant win. I hope this opportunity galvanises MPs to act according to their real beliefs and they vote against any crappy deals. maybe a second referendum is in order. Gina Miller is getting death threats, that's brexiters for you. hypocritical, deluded and a bit thick. they are morons because this is democracy in action yet they are whining about the sovereignty of the British parliament, well parliament IS fucking sovereign, that's why they are having a vote. jeez.

{{Nice one Newsnight There's hope for the BBC yet!}}

For those interested in the legal facts.

http://ipkitten.blogspot.no/2016/11/breaking-news-brexit-high-court-rules.html

I'm actually going to an open meeting about with the leading EU-Law professor of my faculty in abt an hour.

This, on the other hand, is what I find really dangerous;


http://www.legalcheek.com/2016/11/17-one-crown-office-row-qcs-sign-open-letter-slamming-liz-truss-inadequate-defence-of-brexit-judges/

Some parlimentarians don't deserve their office..

{{{Quite agree- the right wing press were horrendously dangerous with the Daily Mail typically particularly unpleasant carrying a front page with the three judges faces and the headline 'enemies of the people' and even going so far as to insinuate the fact one of the judges is homosexual is somehow relevant to the judgement. Sleazy, horrible stuff I expect from the Mail, but this was also reckless journalism. And the response from May and her ministers was woefully inadequate as a counterbalance of any sort. }}}

Brexit is all getting very boring now. May can't win whatever she does. British politics is in a stupid place at the moment... a politician can't get through a day without being told how they have 'failed' at something. The whole bloody thing is a failure!

That bloody Sturgeon is getting in my nerves too. Maybe this should be in the crabbit thread but she needs to shut the fuck up.

{{No she doesn't she is speaking up for Scotlands interests in this, thats her job }}}

Fuck off.

Scotland voted to be part of the union not to pick and choose which pieces of the union to be part of.

If you lot wanted that power, you had the chance to vote for it and you didn't (as a whole.. not you specifically).

{{We did indeed vote to remain. For a Union that not only included membership of the EU but which was a central plank of the No camp- their claim the ONLY way to safeguard Scotlands place in the EU was to vote No. That proved completely untrue and leaving the EU is a material change of circumstances to the deal we voted for. Which was a UK inside the EU.

We also, after that, voted in a pro-EU SNP government again to safe guard Scottish interests within the Union.
Given every single council constituency in Scotland voted to remain its clear her job is to protect Scottish interest with the EU as best as possible- which means getting deals on fisheries, agriculture, single market access or equivalent, and control over creating our own international deals for Scottish industries- and if she has to wave the big Independence stick about a bit, or threaten legal or procedural means to slow up Brexit to get it then that's fine by me (you cant negotiate if you have nothing to negotiate with!).

At least we know where she stands, what she is trying to get out of it and how she is going about it- none of which can be said for the UK government or May}}}

I don't remember all that being in the referendum question...

the Daily mail is an appalling rag. how dare they print this garbage. its a complete travesty. Liz Truss needs to grow some and defend the judges. As for Sturgeon if she can add the voice of Scotland to proceedings maybe Gibraltar and Northern Ireland will join the fight and slowly slowly catchy monkey. When you think about it its in Sturgeons interests if brexit goes through because she can put Independence back on the table, if brexit failed there would be no reason to push for it, so will she vote against brexit in a parliamentary vote? but really imo the more people who make brexit difficult the more I like it. the pound has already recovered a bit since this legal ruling.

I don't remember all that being in the referendum question...-Lance

{{We were promised a lot to vote No- 'the only way to protect Scotland’s EU membership is to reject independence.'- David Cameron

“EU membership only guaranteed with a No vote”. - No Campaign poster.

Wasnt the only thing they have gone back on since with Davey the then enryg Sec to blame for some whoppers-

“Scotland could lose billions in renewable energy subsidies with a Yes vote and would put our green energy revolution at risk”. - Davey

Following the referendum Westminster cut public funding of onshore wind farms at an estimated cost to eh Scottish economy of 3 billion.

Davey also said of the Peterhead carbon capture project 'a yes would endanger this vital project' following the result his department withdrew their promised 1 billion of backing and the project failed.


Figg- Sturgeon and her ministers have been having lots of meetings with the other areas that voted to remain to try to have a joint strategy }}}

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-citizenship-freedom-of-movement-passport-how-to-keep-parliament-live-move-abroad-a7405196.html

you can't just turn round and change your mind two years later demanding a new referendum every-time things don't go your way, tough shit- Malick

{{Depends I would say on what you are elected on. The SNP post the referendum result stood on a platform to hold another referendum if 'there was a material change in circumstances' to the Union and Scotlands status within it. Their manifesto even gave examples of what would constitute a 'material change' and top of the list was being taken out of the EU against the wishes of the people of Scotland.

They were then elected on that manifesto to government. So when brexit happened they were utterly within their rights as an elected government to carry out their manifesto commitment to the people who voted fopr them.

But for anyone looking close enough the second referendum is not what this is about, that and the other stuff the SNP are doing in coordination with our devolved areas is to make sure we get stuff out of this and more powers and control. Independence is just the card in the back pocket for when negotiations get tough.

Sturgeons real maneuvers have been about getting things like fisheries transferred to the Scottish Parliament not Westminster when it comes back from the EU- she wants Scotland to be able to make it sown trade deals, she wants to try to retain access to the single market, she wants control of immigration as scotlands immigration needs are the complete opposite of englands, and a raft of other stuff- all of which suppose a Scotland out of the Eu but within the Union and with no referendum required. }}}

Regardless of what is in the manifesto... it was post indyref so I am not sure on what basis they think they can keep those promises.

Again, the original question was around staying in the Union. Scotland said yes knowing full well what the political landscape in the rest of the UK was.

I don't think Sturgeon had the right to anything here. I thought she was playing her cards quite well until the last few weeks. At some point she will need to be put in her place and told that it is she that needs to respect the will of the people who voted to staye in the Union and therefore accept it's direction as a whole.

I am not sure on what basis they think they can keep those promises.- Lance

{{On the basis thats her job. Present a manifesto to the people. Get elected on that manifesto by the people. Carry out that mainfesto for the people. Its called democracy!


'the original question was around staying in the Union.'

Its true the question on the ballot was stay or leave, but the arguments made and especially the promises made in the Vow backed by all Unionist parties and the claim the only way to safeguard EU membership was to vote for the Union were front and centre in the campaigning.
And no one in the UK took the idea Brexit would happen seriously at the time of the independence referendum. Which is why the No side ran on the Eu argument they did. They were the ones who made it a big deal in the debate as they saw it as a weakness in the SNP argument that they could not guarantee EU membership if Scotland was independent.

'I don't think Sturgeon had the right to anything here.'

She is First Minister of Scotland elected to protect the interests of the nation. If the deal the UK returns from the negotiations seems to leave Scotland significantly worse off than the current set up does then she is not only perfectly within her right to oppose that and offer an alternative to the people of Scotland, its her duty too.

'At some point she will need to be put in her place'

Sheis First Minister of a country, not some wee wifey who needs to be shoved back in her box.
The No side in the referendum made a big deal of how Scotland would be an equal partner in the UK, that our voice was equal to Englands. May repeated this when she became PM and in relation to Brexit said the devolved nations would be fully involved.
So far 1 meeting at which the devolved ministers said they learned nothing at all that was not already public knowledge in the press.

So no, she doesn't need put back in her place, she needs to keep doing exactly what she is doing and keep fighting for what is in the best interests of Scotland.


'she that needs to respect the will of the people who voted to staye in the Union and therefore accept it's direction as a whole.'

Nothing the SNP are doing goes against this- their position is basically straight-forward- if Brexit is to happen Scotland wants certain things out of it that our government deem vital to the health of our economy. If they are frozen out and dont get any concessions form Westminster on any of these things then the SNP will inform the Scottish people they think the deal is bad and not in our interest and that independence would be a better option.
It would then be up to the people to decide if that was the case base don the deal we get out of Brexit.

Sturgeon is no fool , she is not going to just call a referendum for short term political reasons, she knows if she calls it she has to win it or that is it for a long time.

The deal will have to be bad and the polls will have to reflect that feeling among the people for a sustained period before she would risk triggering another referendum.

So regards those who voted to remain in the union- there is nothing the SNP are currently doing in trying to safeguard powers form Brussels to Scotland rather than Westminster which anti-Union. It is still devolved powers with a devolved administration she is seeking to get. And that is her job- just as it was when the Labour and the Tories, Unionists, backed the recent transfer of tax and benefit powers to Holyrood. }}}

From here Petty, it looks like she has always had an agenda to get another indyref. It has gone from 'not in this generation' to soon drafting the legislation.

I think she knows a second loss would effectively kill any chance of it happening in her lifetime and is doing what she can to get the public over to her way of thinking.

I don't think Scotland has any grounds to call for anything at the moment. The public votes knowing that the decision meant they would have to follow the rest of the UK with whatever it got itself in to. Regardless of the campaigningredients.. people knew UKIP etc were getting more vocal and there was talk of the EU referendum so that is no excuse.

I don't think she is respecting the vote at all. She wants independence and that is what she is aiming for.

I think she knows a second loss would effectively kill any chance of it happening in her lifetime and is doing what she can to get the public over to her way of thinking.- Lance

Sturgeon has not been coy on this matter she is crystal clear- she will not call another election unless there is sustained (ie minimum of 6 months) where all polling shows there is a clear majority for it (60%+ according to Sturgeon- as a comparison the latest YouGov poll has it at 47% to 53% in favour of the Union). She has openly said she wont call one unless she is pretty damn sure she will win it from the start.

But she does, and rightly, reserve the right to call another referendum if the Brexit deal is bad for Scotland.
That is not the same as saying we are going to have another referendum come what may. Which is not what she is saying or ever has.
It depends on several factors crucial amongst them- sustained desire for it and what Scotland gets in the way of powers from Brussels when we do leave and what access we have to EU markets.

Assuming she gets enough of what she is asking for- say Fisheries devolved to Scotland and agriculture too, doubt she will get free movement of people but she might get limited powers over say student visas and the like or around NHS workers. And single market access may be possible in a round about way depending on what final positions NI and Gibraltar take up. If she gets all that there wont be any need to call a referendum, and the polls will not show support for one in those circumstances either.
But she needs to have the threat of another Independence referendum to negotiate her position with. You don't play poker with no cards in your hand.

And it allo does go back to the old SNP plan of slow but sure power creep. Which is what got them this far to begin with.

'From here Petty, it looks like she has always had an agenda to get another indyref. '

Thats not my fault you get your info from a right wing anti-SNP press. A perfect example- same as Westminster at start of new government they lay out what their plans are for the coming term- according to the press the SNP's plans were 'INDEPENDENCE!" 'SNP eye off the ball focused only on independence.'

In actual fact there were 44 proposals of which the 44th and final was for a draft Independence bill to be prepared. The other 43 were firmly focused on domestic policy. And the actually important one about negotiating Scotland place post Brexit from within the Union was ignored by the press (I refer you to the link to the excellent Brian Taylor (BBC Scotland political editor) I posted somewhere above for analysis of this).

In the case of Brexit what the SNP are currently doing is trying to negotiate a deal for Scotland within the Union outside the EU- with independence as a final option if all else fails and as a bartering chip in the meantime. Regards independence all they are doing there is preparing a draft legislation so if needed its ready to go.

All of this is her job- as leader of the SNP is her duty to try to bring the country to the position of wanting independence as that's the wishes of her party membership, as First Minister its her duty to secure Scotland the best deal within the Union for everyone yes and no voters.  
She is doing both those things. }}}}

the price of oil will factor in her calling for a second indiref. I doubt there is much appetite for it at the moment, but that wont stop her using it as a blunt weapon. I think people are more concerned about brexit. if she can disrupt brexit I wont be complaining.

http://newsthump.com/2016/11/12/nicola-sturgeon-refuses-to-accept-result-of-england-vs-scotland-match/